Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/340,268

Method and Device for the Additive Manufacturing of a Workpiece

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Examiner
BROWN, MICHAEL J
Art Unit
2115
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
905 granted / 1029 resolved
+32.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1053
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§103
43.0%
+3.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1029 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1, 4-11, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coeck et al. [Coeck] (US PGPub 2018/0169948) in view of Crane et al. [Crane] (US PGPub 2020/0184632). As to claim 1 Coeck discloses a method for additively manufacturing a workpiece (object 424, see Fig. 4A), the method comprising: obtaining a dataset (2-D or 3-D data; see paragraph 0025, line 4) that defines the workpiece in a plurality of workpiece layers (successive powder layers; see paragraph 0026, line 10) arranged one on top of another (see paragraph 0025, lines 4-6 and paragraph 0026, lines 7-11; built layer by layer with layer spread on top of each other); producing the plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another in a plurality of sequential production steps using a layer forming tool (leveling drum 422, see Fig. 4A) controlled based on the dataset (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11), wherein: the plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another form a layer stack (successive powder layers spread on top of each other; see paragraph 0026, lines 10-11) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11), and the layer stack, at a defined point in time (precise time; see paragraph 0035, line 11), has a respective uppermost workpiece layer (top most layer of powder; see paragraph 0027, line 3) and a number of workpiece layers underneath (additional layers; see paragraph 0050, line 5) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11 and paragraph 0035, lines 10-14); recording a plurality of images (captured pixelated images; see paragraph 0030, line 5) of the respective uppermost workpiece layer after the thermal excitation with an image recording rate of at least 1 kHz (see paragraph 0034, lines 10-13; paragraph 0044, lines 10-17; and paragraph 0047, lines 11-18); and inspecting the layer stack using the plurality of images in order to obtain an inspection result (temperature fluctuations for each layer during the scanning and recoating process; see paragraph 0031, lines 15-16) that is representative of the workpiece (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-14), wherein at least one of an individual deformation profile over time or an individual temperature profile over time (thermal history) of the respective uppermost workpiece layer in response to the thermal excitation is determined using the plurality of images (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-16), and wherein the inspection result is obtained as a function of the at least one of the individual deformation profile over time or the individual temperature profile over time (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-16). Though Coeck discloses the method obtaining the inspection results based on a temperature profile over time; Coeck fails to specifically disclose the method thermally exciting the layer stack at the defined point in time with a first pulsed thermal excitation having a pulse duration of between 0.5 ms and 50 ms, wherein the first pulsed thermal excitation includes a first spatially structured heating pattern that heats the respective uppermost workpiece layer in parallel at a plurality of mutually spatially distant excitation points. Crane discloses a method for additively manufacturing a workpiece (3D printed part 130, see Fig. 7A) thermally exciting a layer stack (fused raw powder together layer-by-layer; see paragraph 0064, lines 5-6) at a defined point in time with a first pulsed thermal excitation (thermal energy pulse; see paragraph 0008, lines 4-5) having a pulse duration (pulse duration; see paragraph 0008, line 6) of between 0.5 ms and 50 ms (see paragraph 0008, lines 1-12; paragraph 0011, lines 1-5; and paragraph 0113, lines 1-6), wherein the first pulsed thermal excitation includes a first spatially structured heating pattern that heats the respective uppermost workpiece layer in parallel at a plurality of mutually spatially distant excitation points (see paragraph 0117, lines 7-14 and paragraph 0164, lines 6-12). Coeck and Crane are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor which is defect detection of 3D parts produced by additive manufacturing. At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Coeck’s invention with Crane’s in order to use Pulse Thermography (PT) detect defects of Coeck’s 3D object 424, since doing so would minimize the number of defects within the final structure and improve the quality and reliability of the printed part (see Crane paragraph 0007, lines 12-15). As to claim 4 Crane discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern has a spatial periodicity along the respective uppermost workpiece layer (see paragraph 0164, lines 6-9). As to claim 5 Crane discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern has a matrix structure with a plurality of spaced-apart heating points distributed on the respective uppermost workpiece layer (see paragraph 0164, lines 6-12). As to claim 6 Coeck discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is produced using a heating laser and an optical element arranged in a beam path of the heating laser (see paragraph 0027, lines 1-8). As to claim 7 Crane discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is produced using a plurality of spatially distributed heating coils (radiant heat shields) (see claim 17). As to claim 8 Crane discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is produced using a scanning electron beam (see paragraph 0064, lines 1-6 and paragraph 0164, lines 6-9). As to claim 9 Coeck discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the plurality of images are recorded using a camera that forms part of an interferometric measurement system (see paragraph 0029, lines 1-7 and paragraph 0030, lines 6-14). As to claim 10 Coeck discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the plurality of images are recorded using an infrared camera (see paragraph 0029, lines 1-7). As to claim 11 Coeck discloses a method for additively manufacturing a workpiece (object 424, see Fig. 4A), the method comprising: obtaining a dataset (2-D or 3-D data; see paragraph 0025, line 4) that defines the workpiece in a plurality of workpiece layers (successive powder layers; see paragraph 0026, line 10) arranged one on top of another (see paragraph 0025, lines 4-6 and paragraph 0026, lines 7-11; built layer by layer with layer spread on top of each other), producing the plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another using a layer forming tool (leveling drum 422, see Fig. 4A) which is controlled in dependence on the dataset (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11), wherein the plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another form a layer stack (successive powder layers spread on top of each other; see paragraph 0026, lines 10-11) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11) which, at a defined point in time (precise time; see paragraph 0035, line 11), has a respective uppermost workpiece layer (top most layer of powder; see paragraph 0027, line 3) and a number of workpiece layers underneath (additional layers; see paragraph 0050, line 5) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11 and paragraph 0035, lines 10-14), thermally exciting the layer stack at the defined point in time (see paragraph 0027, lines 8-15), recording a plurality of measurement signals (captured pixelated images; see paragraph 0030, line 5) from the respective uppermost workpiece layer after the thermal excitation (see paragraph 0034, lines 10-13; paragraph 0044, lines 10-17; and paragraph 0047, lines 11-18), and inspecting the layer stack using the plurality of measurement signals in order to obtain an inspection result (temperature fluctuations for each layer during the scanning and recoating process; see paragraph 0031, lines 15-16) which is representative of the workpiece (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-14), wherein at least one of near-surface deformations of the layer stack or surface temperatures of the layer stack are determined (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-16). Though Coeck discloses the method obtaining the inspection results based on a temperature profile over time; Coeck fails to specifically disclose the method wherein the layer stack is excited with a first spatially structured heating pattern that heats the respective uppermost workpiece layer at a first plurality of spatially separate regions at the defined point in time, and wherein the inspection result is determined in dependence on the first spatially structured heating pattern. Crane discloses a method for additively manufacturing a workpiece (3D printed part 130, see Fig. 7A) wherein a layer stack (fused raw powder together layer-by-layer; see paragraph 0064, lines 5-6) is excited with a spatially structured heating pattern that heats the respective uppermost workpiece layer at a first plurality of spatially separate regions at a defined point in time (see paragraph 0008, lines 1-12; paragraph 0011, lines 1-5; and paragraph 0113, lines 1-6), and wherein the inspection result is determined in dependence on the spatially structured heating pattern (see paragraph 0117, lines 7-14 and paragraph 0164, lines 6-12). Coeck and Crane are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor which is defect detection of 3D parts produced by additive manufacturing. At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Coeck’s invention with Crane’s in order to use Pulse Thermography (PT) detect defects of Coeck’s 3D object 424, since doing so would minimize the number of defects within the final structure and improve the quality and reliability of the printed part (see Crane paragraph 0007, lines 12-15). As to claim 14 Crane discloses the method of claim 11 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern has a spatial periodicity along the respective uppermost workpiece layer (see paragraph 0164, lines 6-9). As to claim 15 Crane discloses the method of claim 11 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern has a matrix structure with a plurality of spaced-apart heating points distributed on the respective uppermost workpiece layer (see paragraph 0164, lines 6-12). As to claim 16 Coeck discloses the method of claim 11 wherein the measurement signals include a plurality of temporally successive images of the uppermost workpiece layer (see paragraph 0030, lines 4-14). As to claim 17 Crane discloses the method of claim 16 wherein the plurality of images are recorded with an image recording rate > 1 kHz, and wherein the layer stack is thermally excited with a pulse-shaped thermal excitation with a pulse duration of between 0.5 ms and 50 ms (see paragraph 0008, lines 1-12; paragraph 0011, lines 1-5; and paragraph 0113, lines 1-6). As to claim 18 Crane discloses the method of claim 11 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is varied over time (see paragraph 0070, lines 1-3). As to claim 19 Crane discloses the method of claim 11 wherein at least one of an individual deformation profile over time or an individual temperature profile over time of the respective uppermost workpiece layer is determined in response to the thermal excitation (see paragraph 0070, lines 1-3). As to claim 20 Coeck discloses an apparatus (system 100/additive manufacturing devices 106a, 106b; see Fig. 1) for additively manufacturing a workpiece (object 424, see Fig. 4A), the apparatus comprising: a memory (memory 220, see Fig. 2) configured to obtain a dataset (2-D or 3-D data; see paragraph 0025, line 4) that defines the workpiece in a plurality of workpiece layers (successive powder layers; see paragraph 0026, line 10) arranged one on top of another (see paragraph 0025, lines 4-6 and paragraph 0026, lines 7-11; built layer by layer with layer spread on top of each other); a manufacturing platform (powder bed; see paragraph 0029, line 6); a layer forming tool (leveling drum 422, see Fig. 4A); a heating tool (radiation heater; see paragraph 0027, line 12); a measurement device (thermal imaging device 436, see Fig. 4B) directed at the manufacturing platform (see paragraph 0030, lines 7-23); and an evaluation and control unit (control computer 434, see Fig. 4B) configured to: produce a plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another on the manufacturing platform using the layer forming tool and the dataset (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11), wherein the plurality of workpiece layers arranged one on top of another form a layer stack (successive powder layers spread on top of each other; see paragraph 0026, lines 10-11) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11) which, at a defined point in time (precise time; see paragraph 0035, line 11), has a respective uppermost workpiece layer (top most layer of powder; see paragraph 0027, line 3) and a number of workpiece layers underneath (additional layers; see paragraph 0050, line 5) (see paragraph 0026, lines 7-11 and paragraph 0035, lines 10-14), record a plurality of measurement signals (captured pixelated images; see paragraph 0030, line 5) from the respective uppermost workpiece layer using the measurement device (see paragraph 0034, lines 10-13; paragraph 0044, lines 10-17; and paragraph 0047, lines 11-18), the measurement signals representing at least one of near-surface deformations of the layer stack or surface temperatures of the layer stack, and inspect the layer stack using the plurality of measurement signals to obtain an inspection result (temperature fluctuations for each layer during the scanning and recoating process; see paragraph 0031, lines 15-16) that is representative of the workpiece (see paragraph 0031, lines 10-14). Though Coeck discloses the apparatus comprising an evaluation and control unit configured to obtain the inspection results based on a temperature profile over time; Coeck fails to specifically disclose the evaluation and control unit configured to use the heating tool in order to thermally excite the layer stack at the defined point in time with a first spatially structured heating pattern which heats the uppermost workpiece layer at a first plurality of spatially separate regions at the defined point in time, wherein the evaluation and control unit is configured to determine the inspection result in dependence on the first spatially structured heating pattern. Crane discloses an apparatus for additively manufacturing a workpiece (3D printed part 130, see Fig. 7A), the apparatus comprising an evaluation and control unit configured to: use a heating tool in order to thermally excite a layer stack (fused raw powder together layer-by-layer; see paragraph 0064, lines 5-6) at the defined point in time with a first spatially structured heating pattern which heats the uppermost workpiece layer at a first plurality of spatially separate regions at the defined point in time (see paragraph 0008, lines 1-12; paragraph 0011, lines 1-5; and paragraph 0113, lines 1-6), wherein the evaluation and control unit is configured to determine the inspection result in dependence on the first spatially structured heating pattern (see paragraph 0117, lines 7-14 and paragraph 0164, lines 6-12). Coeck and Crane are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor which is defect detection of 3D parts produced by additive manufacturing. At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Coeck’s invention with Crane’s in order to use Pulse Thermography (PT) detect defects of Coeck’s 3D object 424, since doing so would minimize the number of defects within the final structure and improve the quality and reliability of the printed part (see Crane paragraph 0007, lines 12-15). Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coeck et al. [Coeck] (US PGPub 2018/0169948), in view of Crane et al. [Crane] (US PGPub 2020/0184632), and further in view of Cher et al. [Cher] (US Patent No. 8,489,217). As to claim 2 Coeck and Crane disclose the method as cited in claim 1; however, Coeck and Crane fail to specifically disclose the method wherein the respective uppermost workpiece layer is further thermally excited with a second spatially structured heating pattern, wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern and the second spatially structured heating pattern differ from one another, and wherein the inspection result is determined in dependence on both the first spatially structured heating pattern and in dependence on the second spatially structured heating pattern. Cher discloses a method wherein a respective uppermost workpiece layer (device layer 302a, see Fig. 4A) is further thermally excited with a second spatially structured heating pattern (inverted heating pattern; see column 1, line 54), wherein a first spatially structured heating pattern (heating pattern; see column 1, line 44) and the second spatially structured heating pattern differ from one another (inverted), and wherein the inspection result (warping and cracking; see column 1, line 57) is determined in dependence on both the first spatially structured heating pattern and in dependence on the second spatially structured heating pattern (see column 1, lines 44-57). Coeck, Crane, and Cher are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor which is 3D object defect minimization. At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Coeck’s and Crane’s invention with Cher’s in order to invert heating patterns between consecutive layers in Coeck’s 3D object 424 (see Cher column 1, lines 44-45), since doing so would minimize peak temperatures (see Cher column 1, lines 45-46). As to claim 3 Cher discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is at least one of rotated or inverted in order to produce the second spatially structured heating pattern (see column 1, lines 44-57). As to claim 12 Coeck and Crane disclose the method as cited in claim 11; however, Coeck and Crane fail to specifically disclose the method wherein the respective uppermost workpiece layer is further thermally excited with a second spatially structured heating pattern, wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern and the second spatially structured heating pattern differ from one another, and wherein the inspection result is determined in dependence on both the first spatially structured heating pattern and in dependence on the second spatially structured heating pattern. Cher discloses a method wherein a respective uppermost workpiece layer (device layer 302a, see Fig. 4A) is further thermally excited with a second spatially structured heating pattern (inverted heating pattern; see column 1, line 54), wherein a first spatially structured heating pattern (heating pattern; see column 1, line 44) and the second spatially structured heating pattern differ from one another (inverted), and wherein the inspection result (warping and cracking; see column 1, line 57) is determined in dependence on both the first spatially structured heating pattern and in dependence on the second spatially structured heating pattern (see column 1, lines 44-57). Coeck, Crane, and Cher are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor which is 3D object defect minimization. At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Coeck’s and Crane’s invention with Cher’s in order to invert heating patterns between consecutive layers in Coeck’s 3D object 424 (see Cher column 1, lines 44-45), since doing so would minimize peak temperatures (see Cher column 1, lines 45-46). As to claim 13 Cher discloses the method of claim 12 wherein the first spatially structured heating pattern is at least one of rotated or inverted in order to produce the second spatially structured heating pattern (see column 1, lines 44-57). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J. Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30am-4:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571)272-2279. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Michael J Brown/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600093
Information Processing Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594602
Systems and Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594727
EXTRUSION-BASED ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING: METHOD AND 3D PRINTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570051
CONVOLUTION MODELING AND LEARNING SYSTEM FOR PREDICTING GEOMETRIC SHAPE ACCURACY OF 3D PRINTED PRODUCTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574794
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING AND/OR OPERATING AN AUTOMATION COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+8.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1029 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month